Initiating Best Maintenance Practices in the Pulp and Paper Industry
By John Yolton, Indus International
With competition in the paper industry coming from a variety of quarters, many of which did not exist even a few years ago, the challenge to remain profitable places greater and greater emphasis on those actions within the mill that can affect the bottom line. The maintenance effort has finally come under minute scrutiny by the upper echelons of management, who refuse to accept the time-honored premise that maintenance is a "necessary evil." Rather, they are expecting, rightfully so, that improved management of the maintenance effort is an opportunity to add to the profitability of the operation. Many have expectations that modifications to the maintenance effort within a mill have "low hanging fruit" potential, which is easily acquired with relatively little effort.
In the past, inspired managers have allowed some freedom for change of the existing maintenance function, as long as the performance of the operations did not suffer as a result. Many times the measurement of that operating performance was poorly, if at all, documented simply because the tools for collecting and analyzing data were not present. Those times are past.
Recently, an evaluation technique has emerged for maintenance. Although the principles of this technique have always been present, the tools used for the evaluation have required improvement. That process is called Best Practices.
At least one major North American pulp and paper firm has implemented a company-wide best practices initiative and many other individual mills with enlightened management are seeking the best practices for their operations' maintenance.
These strategies require an understanding that certain practices within an operation contribute to performance that exceeds that of competitors. Research of these practices is performed by a variety of people and organizations, and much has been published relating to best practices. The list of best practices used by various "best-of-breed" industries has been determined and well documented. Following is an explanation of some of these identified maintenance best practices being used by industry:
Maintenance Work Flow Control
Any action requires some measure of control. To control or manage the action and future similar actions requires information concerning each action. This usually takes the form of a work order to which additional information is applied throughout the course of whatever action is taken. Even today, with the availability of software systems that run on anything from desktop PCs to corporate-wide client/server configurations, some paper mill operations still fail to document their maintenance work in any form and are expecting to successfully compete with those that do.
Controlling the flow of the identified work is tantamount to managing the overall maintenance effort. Typical "reactive" responses to maintenance needs in a mill is indicative of a lack of work flow control. No one is managing the process.
An example of work flow not being managed is the situation where a supervisor tracks down a maintenance mechanic and requests immediate help with a particular problem, more than likely not even an urgent or high-priority breakdown work assignment. This is a disruptive, non-effective practice.
Fortunately, in our industry this situation rarely occurs.
Preventive Maintenance (PM)
Everyone has a PM program, or so we are told. Unfortunately not everyone fully utilizes the existing program to its ultimate capabilities, or they severely abuse the intent of the program by overburdening it with "wants" versus "needs."
- The PM program may not currently be applied to the right equipment.
- The technology may have changed but the program for its care has not.
- The staffing requirements for PM routines are not met because of other "more critical." higher-priority needs.
- The scheduled downtime associated with preventive maintenance is viewed as potential operating time to be used as make up for the lost time occurring from other, unexpected outages.
An example of a best practice for preventive maintenance is for the machine shutdown schedule to staff the PM workload first, then to mete out the remaining staff resources, by priority, as indicated by staff availability. In addition, concurrent ongoing analysis of the PM requirements is routinely performed and non-effective PM tasks are removed from the program and other tasks are added, up to the level of available staffing.
Operations Responsibilities
Maintenance of operating equipment is an operating responsibility. The degree to which equipment or a facility is maintained is determined and approved by the operators. The expertise and capabilities of the maintenance force and its management determine the quality and quantity of work performed. In many cases, in today's highly competitive market, the operators themselves are now performing many of the former "maintenance" tasks, where skills are not a factor. This use of operators to perform basic maintenance tasks is called TPM (total productive maintenance). The highly successful paper mills in the world have recognized this basic assignment of responsibility sharing.
As an example, an integrated pulp and paper mill, having a number of business units within a single complex, placed significant and unwieldy demands upon its traditional maintenance organization, i.e., business unit staffing (see figure below).
A revision to the organization was made (see figure below), placing limited maintenance resources at the hands of individual business units, while retaining core functional responsibilities for maintenance with a central authority. Initiating a change in the operating responsibility philosophy associated with this change led to uncommon cooperation among the competing business units. Additionally, the mill sought flexibility from the union that would allow certain maintenance activities by the operating workforce, such as, tightening bolts, minor adjustments of equipment, inspections, and limited lubrication tasks.
Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM)
Analysis of lost production opportunities as a result of equipment failure, or a lack of specific management processes or policy, is a sure-fire way of deciding upon corrective actions to prevent similar future occurrences. Many mills practice this "feed-back" methodology for reducing their equipment downtimes and personnel related safety problems. The best mills have set up the RCM process within their facilities and follow the procedures with discipline. There are many published techniques explaining this process, but in simplistic terms it follows this flow:
It is not atypical for an RCM analysis to solve a significant problem with a simple inspection or PM routine.
One mill investigated a catastrophic failure resulting in days of paper machine downtime after a suspended press roll came crashing down through the press section, narrowly missing operating personnel changing the felt. The RCM process analysis of the overhead crane hoist controlling mechanisms revealed that the root cause of failure was a failed limit switch that had never been inspected during the crane's eight year history. That simple inspection was added to the mill's PM program and equipment reliability was stabilized.
Materials Management
The most efficient mills in the world today recognize that management of the materials used in the performance of maintenance is a definite best practice. Contributing factors include locating maintenance inventory relative to the work areas, spare parts delivery schemes, improved parts identification through the availability of bills of materials for an asset, and vendor managed inventories, among others. Enough research on this one subject has shown that relatively simple changes to current practices in this category can contribute as much as 10% to the overall efficiency of a maintenance effort.
An example: One northeastern mill established the position of maintenance materials coordinator. Sole responsibility…understand the need for parts and know the disposition of those parts, i.e., order status, storage location, etc. All maintenance parts requisitions, including stores, were funneled or copied through this position so that knowledge of the purchase was established. This function then determined location of non-stores items and maintained an accurate equipment parts storage plan for use by maintenance mechanics. The time saved by workers looking for materials were significant.
Another example: An integrated pulp and paper complex assigned storeroom control of MRO to the mill's maintenance management in conjunction with the installation of a modern integrated maintenance and stores information and control system. Inventory control of operating supplies such as machine clothing and chemicals was assigned to the operating areas, which also had access to the shared information and control system. The result was reduction in slow-moving and obsolete stock, tighter control of OPs and OQs, more vendor-controlled stock, and significantly less conflict and turmoil among the users of stored materials.
Diagnostics
These predictive maintenance technologies are firmly in place at most paper mills, and wide-spread best practice now centers upon the application and functional use of the technologies available. These application and technology discussions continue today. The fact is well established that the use of diagnostics, with follow-up corrective actions associated with prior notification of failure, leads to improved reliability and bottom line performance.
Examples of diagnostics technologies include:
Asset Care Management Systems
Having a computerized system and realizing the potential from that system is a controversial matter today. The fact remains, however, that accurate, timely, widely available information is key to making effective decisions regarding the care of assets. Having and using an asset care management information system is a best practice. An analysis of the "as-is" situation will immediately identify the presence of a number of "standalone" systems. Generally, these take the form of both manual and electronic (usually spreadsheets). Various people within the organization are using the standalone systems to archive information, and track mill processes, such as motor changes, roll records, safety data, RCM, PM's, etc. Unfortunately, because a single user has usually developed the system, the valuable information captured is not widely available to other users who would benefit from the information.
An example: A large, integrated paper company is purchasing one of the leading BOB (best-of-breed) asset care management information systems after undergoing a significant research and selection process. The implementation process includes self-examination of existing business processes. During that examination and analysis process, the mill's management is surprised to find so many standalone systems being used daily by people within the mill. Incorporating the data within those unique systems into the new asset care management system enables the entire workforce to access information important to the day-to-day operations.
Continuous Improvement
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it" is not a best practice concept. That strategy, referred to as the "caretaker" syndrome, follows the belief that improvement is not required, that everything will be just "fine" without disruptive change. The more effective maintenance efforts within the industry today have all adopted another common belief, which is, "where we are today only makes us better than the competition, it does not make us the best." Constantly striving to improve the current status, whether in skills competency, equipment utilization, productivity, etc., is an indication of a facility's desire to achieve competitive superiority.
It is human nature to desire improvement in current circumstances, but it is also human nature to resist change. The key to successful continuous improvement is to replace the existing with something better. The process for success is "selling" that change on the basis that it will improve the life of those involved.
Example: A western US mill replaces its maintenance manager with an "outsider," rather than following the time-honored tradition of replacement from within. The new manager begins renovation of the organization after a thorough examination of the "as-is" conditions. He makes personal contact and shares the vision with every maintenance employee and those in operations and administration affected by the proposed change. He incorporates suggestions from this informational exchange process.
Within a year, the new organization is producing results, including a 15.6% increase in production, some of which is directly attributable to reliability improvements resulting from the new organization. The maintenance manager continues to make "adjustments" to the maintenance functions, enhancing their performance. The mill adds another 6.6% in production the following year, only to confront a capacity-limiting obstacle .The mill experiences the first-ever successful contract negotiation without a strike. These are all part of a series of "continuous" improvements.
Continuous Improvement is a process, not a product, or a final state.
Conclusion
These are some examples of the best practices being used today by maintenance functions in the 'best-of-breed' mills in the paper industry. These companies have taken the time to identify what other operations are using to improve their maintenance efforts. This constant search for best practices, a process called benchmarking (another best practice), is not necessarily restricted to looking at other operations in the paper industry. In fact RCM came out of the airplane manufacturing industry, but the practice applies to our industry as well…usually, however, with modifications (but that is another story).
So what should be a mill's maintenance strategy?
- To become a force in providing the mill with a competitive advantage?
How will this wizardry be performed?
- By continuing to follow practices the mill currently uses?
- By applying best practices?
For more information contact: John Yolton, Indus International, 770-989-4110